PT -期刊文章盟M.J.巴克斯顿盟道。沙利文AU - L.F. Andersson盟盟C.J.拉姆- b Liljas AU - W。W会非盟- s·皮德森盟K.B.维斯TI -国家早期干预的成本效益与布地奈德在轻度哮喘援助- 10.1183 / 09031936.04.00108703 DP - 2004 10月01 TA -欧洲呼吸杂志PG - 568——574 VI - 24 IP - 4 4099 - //www.qdcxjkg.com/content/24/4/568.short 4100 - //www.qdcxjkg.com/content/24/4/568.full所以欧元和J2004 10月01;24 AB -早期干预与布地奈德对轻度持续性哮喘是一种有效的策略,这已被证明可以提供更多的临床效益增量成本低使用成本数据。目前作者分析了这种策略是否具有成本效益的使用成本数据为其他国家。基于3年前瞻性,随机,双盲吸入类固醇治疗常规治疗(开始)在早期哮喘研究(比较布地奈德和安慰剂结合常规哮喘治疗),成本效益估计分别为八个不同的国家,从医疗付款和社会的角度来说,增加布地奈德常规哮喘治疗。当地单位成本应用于试验总人口的数据。增量成本效益比率(冷藏工人)估计为每一天无症状成本(陕西林业局)获得。布地奈德陕西林业局增加了每年平均14.1天。从医疗付款人的角度来看,布地奈德的总成本将减少哮喘护理在澳大利亚。在瑞典、加拿大、法国、西班牙、英国、中国和美国,冷藏工人范围从2.4 - -11.3美元/陕西林业局。 From a societal perspective, budesonide would be cost-saving in Australia, Canada and Sweden. In conclusion, for countries where costs with budesonide are higher, the policy implication has to be determined by that health system's willingness to pay for an additional symptom-free day. However, where budesonide therapy increases symptom-free days and reduces total costs, the policy conclusion clearly favours early intervention. This study was fully funded by AstraZeneca R&D, Lund, Sweden. The sponsors of the study had no role in the design, analysis and interpretation of the results of this cost-effectiveness study, with the exception of the company co-authors who participated in all aspects of the study. All investigators had free and unlimited access to the raw data and statistical reports.